captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions >> ifill: good evening. i'm gwen ifill. a stunning upset in the massachusetts senate race. >> brown: and i'm jeffrey brown. on the "newshour" tonight: with a republican winning the seat long held by edward kennedy. we look at what scott brown's victory means for president obama's agenda. >> ifill: then, a powerful aftershock hits haiti as victims are still being pulled from the rubble. and doctors struggle to provide even basic care. >> we are running our operating rooms without electricity, without oxygen, without proper anesthetics. >> brown: margaret warner gets

the latest on the situation in port-au-prince from jason beaubien of n.p.r. >> ifill: paying for the "new york times" on line, but will readers buy in? >> brown: and body scanners in airports. ray suarez reports on a continuing debate. >> they're going to detect prosthetics. they're going to detect vasectomy scars, sex change operations, adult incontinence. >> are they perfect? no. but do they take us very much further down the road to security against this kind of device? the answer to that is yes. ... >> ifill: that's all ahead on tonight's "pbs newshour." major funding for the pbs newshour is provided by:

>> chevron. this is the power of human energy. and by toyota.

and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> ifill: political shock waves rippled outward from massachusetts today. the loss of a u.s. senate seat raised serious doubts about democrats' plans to pass health care reform and for the rest of president obama's agenda as well. until only a few weeks ago, this was the last thing anyone expected to see in boston-- republican scott brown celebrating a special election victory. >> i bet they can hear this cheering all the way in washington, d.c.! ( applause )

>> ifill: brown's definitive victory over state attorney general martha coakley left senate democrats with 59 votes. that's one short of the super- majority the party's used to get key bills passed. and it instantly raised questions about the fate of health care reform legislation. brown campaigned against the democratic health care bills. he argued they would pose an unfair burden on massachusetts, which already has its own health care system. this morning, the senator-elect said what he opposes is washington's approach to health care. >> i think it's important for everyone to get some sort form of health care. so, to offer a basic plan for everybody, i think, is important. it's just a question of whether we're going to raise taxes, we're going to cut half a trillion from medicare, affect veterans' care. i think we can do it better. >> ifill: republicans declared voters sent a clear message in yesterday-- that democrats need to slow down. >> i'm convinced now that no gamesmanship will be played by the other side with regard to future votes in the senate

>> the american people have spoken. the people of massachusetts have spoken for the rest of america. stop this process. sit down and open transparent negotiations. let's begin again from the beginning. >> ifill: indeed, many senate democrats appeared chastened by the brown victory, which some predicted would affect every 2010 race. senate majority leader harry reid suggested voters are as concerned about the economy as they are about health care. >> first of all, we're not going to rush into anything. as you've heard, we're going to wait until the new senator arrives before we do anything more on health care. remember, the bill we passed in the senate is good for a year. there are many different things we can do to move forward on health care. we're not making any of those decisions now. >> ifill: democrat paul kirk, who was appointed to fill the seat left open by senator kennedy's death last year, also

says his party should not miss the message sent by bay state voters. >> there were a lot of things at play in massachusetts. not just national health reform. but every election is an education for the constituents and the voters, and an education for the candidates as well. and i think those who watched the massachusetts election should learn some things from it as well. >> ifill: but even as senate democrats appeared to regroup, house speaker nancy pelosi said she plans to push ahead on health care. >> as i said health care, again, heeding the particular concerns of the voters of massachusetts last night, we heard, we will heed, we will move forward with their considerations in mind, but we will move forward... >> ifill: several rescue options have been floated on capitol hill. one would have the house adopt the senate-passed bill with no changes. another would be to offer a stripped-down version of the

compromise bill, which would require only 51 votes to pass. that is now under consideration at the white house. in an interview with a.b.c. news, president obama suggested his party should now proceed carefully. >> here is my assessment of not just the vote in massachusetts but the mood around the country. the same thing that swept scott brown into office swept me into office. people are angry and they are frustrated. >> ifill: the election results must be certified by the massachusetts secretary of state, and then approved by the governor. that process could take two weeks, but brown said he hopes they expedite the paperwork, and he plans to make courtesy calls in washington thursday. >> since the election is not in doubt, i am hopeful that the senate will seat me on the basis of those unofficial returns. >> ifill: the shakeup in the senate also leaves question marks over the rest of the president's agenda-- from climate change to financial regulation. >> ifill: one senate race with so many implications. here to help us sort through them all are jennifer nassour,

chair of the massachusetts republican party. amy walter, editor-in-chief of the hotline, "national journal's" political daily. and ceci connolly, national health policy reporter for "the washington post." jennifer nassour, we just heard the president say people are angry in the same way that swept him into office is what swept scott brown into office. is that right? >> people are angry. i mean, if you just look here in massachusetts at our voters, they have been through three indicted speakers. they have seen three state senators who have resigned in disgrace, and we just increased sales tax over the summer. the democrats in the house and senate decided right now is a great time to increase our sales tax by 25% during a recession. so people are very frustrated. jobs are leaving massachusetts. the economy isn't growing. the housing market is still not going anywhere so people are very frustrated. >> ifill: yet, republicans are not even close to a majority in

the massachusetts electorate so how did scott brown pull it off? >> well, his message is what resonated with voters. he talked about terror. he talked about taxes. he talked about spending. he talked about jobs. those are all things on everyone's mind right now. if you look at what happened on december 25, right there, national security is very important to people, just as much as taxes and the economy are. >> ifill: is it possible massachusetts is not as blue as we all thought? >> i don't think it's as blue. 51 for the% of our electorate is actually unenroll which would means they're independent. they don't affiliate with either party. that's what took scott, republicans and democrats that voted for him. >> ifill: amy walter let's talk about the independents. we've seen them have an outcome in new jersey, virginia, and in massachusetts. >> and they broke almost exactly the same way in three very different states. now , massachusetts may not be as blue as we once thought but it's certainly a lot bluer than

virginia, and, yet, virginia independents gave the gubernatorial candidate about 66% of the vote. the last polls we saw and heard about in massachusetts scott brown was getting about that same percentage of independents in massachusetts. and in new jersey, you had a republican candidate who got about 60% of independent voters. remember, in massachusetts in 2008, president obama got 57% of the independent voters. it looked like they completely flipped. now, to be fair, these aren't exactly the same voters. i'm sure there are a lot of people who showed up in this election who didn't show up in 2008, people who showed up in 2008 stayed home but i think the anger thing is really and i think it goes beyond scandal and health care. i think there's a fundamental question about the fact that folks aren't taking seriously what independents were saying in 2008. >> ifill : today at the white house news briefing he kept using term requested wake-up" call over and over again pup saw what the president said. you saw what harry reid said.

is it a wake-up call about the entire obama agenda or specific issues. >> i think it's the way they are going about the agenda. a focus group, they all said the same thing, we know the economy is expwad we don't think president obama is going to solve it in a year or two years. the one thing that we know we want to see is a change in washington, a change the way they do things in washington. if he turns out to be one of the "politics as usual" kind of politicians, we're going to turn away from him. and that's exactly what happened. i think they are frustrated by the fact that they've been duped thought they were voting for something in 2008 and find not only are things still the same old-same old bickering in washington but seems to have gotten worse. >> ifill: and perhaps focused on the wrong thing. ceci everybody wants to know

will happen with health care reform. as of tonight, where does that sand? >> well, gwen, the results in massachusetts are a real blow to the prospects for health care reform legislation, and i think i would describe the blow as somewhere between debilitating and fatal, to be honest. here we are exactly one year from obama being sworn in, and we knew from one year ago that time was going to be the enemy of health care reform, and in case democrats had forgotten that, alex capatziano put out a memo saying to republicans we can kill this by delay. and that is exactly what happened. they sort of ran the clock out. they went all the way up to christmas eve, and still didn't complete work. and i think in some respects, what amy is talking about, it's an electorate that looks and says, "you spent a whole year on this , and you guys controlled the house and the senate and the white house,

you couldn't pull it off." >> ifill: was this unhappiness unique with this health care or what people perceive this health care plan to be? was it unique to massachusetts or something catching fire around the country? >> i think what we've seen consistently this year in the polling data is that people are uncertain and they're anxious about what would happen to health care in this country, especially the 180 million americans who have health insurance. they say, "look,iont like it. it's too expensive. i want some things fixed. i wish other people had, too." but at core people are saying don't mess with what i've got. i feel so fragile right now, i'm so anxious about so many other things, and that uncertainty has sort of fueled the frustration that we see. >> ifill: in fact, jennifer nassour, in massachusetts, what they've got is a health care plan that 98% of citizens are required to take part in. so that was part of it? did voters in massachusetts say, "hey, i've got it already. iont really need to buy into a national plan?"

>> that's definitely part of it. we have it here. we know how it works. our spending is a little bit out of control. we definitely need better managers, but, i mean , i think that senator brown said it perfectly, we have it here in massachusetts. every state should have the option whether they want to buy into health care or not. but we do want quality and accessible health care for everyone like we do here in massachusetts. >> ifill: how much did out-of-state activists-- scott brown in the last weeks of the campaign which it lolled he had a chance was embraced by the so-called tea party movement, other people who came into massachusetts to work on his behalf and raise money. how much does dthat affect the outcome? >> we don't-- we don't know who the key party activists are, and i think there are probably just a group of activists that has a label on them, but i met people from different countries that were here to make phone calls and to knock on doors, to people from across the country, as far as washington state that came to boston to help out.

i think it was just different people. >> ifill: did you say different countries, really? >> yes, we had-- i met a young man last night who came from australia. i met another man who came from london. i met another two gentlemen that came from montreal. so people were here from all over the place. and actually, interestingly enough, the men that were here from montreal came because they were so against the u.s. buying into any sort of health care plan right now, and they said if you want to see socialized medicine, come to canada. and so they were here wanting to see the history being made in massachusetts. >> ifill: soccer, amy, what does this tell us about political aftershocks in 2010. i heard barbara boxer say there's not a race that won't be affected by this. >> this is absolutely the case. first, there's not a race that won't be affected in terms of fund-raising. and the outside money definitely was an issue in this race, gwen, but i think was more important when you saw how much money scott brown raised once the alarm was sent that this was actually going to be a close race. in one day he

raised over $1 million. that was considered a big deal, and he kept raising $1 million a day, and another million dollars online, and this used to be the purview, we thought, of liberal democratic activists. this was obama folks raising this kind of money. and now we're seeing republicans can do this, too. recruitment very important right now. the senate's almost done. the house, still we have a long way to go. i think if you are at all on the fence as a republican, you're interested in getting in. if you're a democrat, who is still on the fence, may not want to. i'm looking particularly at delaware, for example, where bowill be biden, the son of vice president biden, is considered a likely candidate for that seat that will be open in 2010. >> ifill: like martha coakley-- >> of course, a blue state! a great last name. >> ifill: is there any effort going on tonight after the first day of shell shock, ceci? the president seemed to hint that there was something that was being cobbled together

to salvage health care? >> interestology that abc interview today , kben, the president used terms like let's coalesce around core elements sglaen meaning? >> some people reading tea leaves are thinking a much more modest, smaller, incremental approach to health care, and that's very much on the table as an option right now, a much smaller approach. the difficult is that in health care it's kind of like one of those balloons, if you do something on one side, you can see more problems pop up over on the other side. so it's not that simple of saying let's just take insurance market reform, for instance or malpractice reform or expabd medicaid. we just do one or two little things because that will exacerbate other problems. i think everyone, as you said, is so shellshocked today they're not thinking through some of the very complex policy issues at stake here. and, frankly, the other is the psyche on capitol hill.

that is a place where everybody sort of gets under that dome , as you know well, and there's a certain psyche that can take hold . and we're really going to see if the democrats are so spooked by this that they just say i just can't stomach it. >> at the same time, they know if they don't pass something, just as you said earlier-- oh, my gosh you spent a year doing this and you have nothing to show for it-- how can they pivot on to economy and jobs and show the voters they can accomplish something. >> ifill: jennifer nassour, amy walter, ceci connolly, thank you all very much. >> brown: and still to come on the "newshour": new tremors rock haiti; new fees for reading the news online and new scanners raise a "privacy versus security" debate in airports. >> ifill: but first, for the other news of the day. here's hari sreenivasan in our newsroom. >> sreenivasan: wall street took a hit today as china announced tighter rules on bank lending. the news raised fears the worldwide recovery might be slowed. the dow jones industrial average lost 122 points to close at

10,603. the nasdaq fell 29 points to close at 2,291. the nation's intelligence chief acknowledged today he made mistakes leading up to the airliner bombing plot. dennis blair conceded that once the plane landed in detroit, the suspect-- umar farouk abdulmutallab-- should have been treated as a terror suspect and questioned by special interrogators. blair also said he should have been more aggressive about adding names to the "no-fly" list, instead of focusing on complaints about the list. >> shame on us for giving into that pressure. we've now greatly expanded the no-fly list from what it was on december 24th and have done a lot more of what is prudent which is to put names on it just in case and then take them off as we need to, but the pressure was quite the other direction. >> sreenivasan: in a separate hearing, republican senator jeff sessions charged the decision to treat abdulmutallab as a conventional criminal was a costly mistake.

>> one of the things we learned from the 9/11 commission is intelligence is what saves lives -- intelligence. and we need to gather intelligence. that's not the motive of the criminal justice system generally in america. it's to prosecute criminals. >> sreenivasan: f.b.i. director robert mueller said the decision to arrest the nigerian suspect was the right move. he said the f.b.i. needed to know immediately if other threats were out there. president obama's nominee to lead the transportation security administration has withdrawn. erroll southers is a top official with the los angeles police department. but he said today opponents had politicized his career. republican senator jim demint had blocked action on southers over concerns he would grant collective bargaining rights to t.s.a. employees. the suspect in a mass killing in virginia turned himself in early today, after an all-night manhunt. christopher speight allegedly gunned down eight people on tuesday, then fired at a police helicopter as he ran into the woods to hide. the scene unfolded just outside

appomattox, virginia. police found three bodies inside spite's home, and four outside. an eighth victim was found barely alive near the house, but died later at a hospital. state police said today they're still looking for a motive and a weapon. >> we are in process of searching for high powered rifle based on investigation into the shots that were fired and struck the helicopter tuesday afternoon. he walked out of the woods and did not have a weapon in his possession and turned himself in to swat team members assigned to that particular location. >> sreenivasan: police and bomb teams searched speight's home today fearing it might be rigged with explosives. in nigeria, soldiers patrolled a city in the central part of the country today after religious violence that has claimed more than 200 lives. clashes between christians and muslims broke out sunday in jos. witnesses described rioters attacking passers-by and security forces with knives and guns. buildings and vehicles were also set on fire. there were conflicting accounts

as to what caused the trouble. a powerful storm barreled across southern california today and forced mandatory evacuations to escape mudslides and flooding. it was the third big storm in recent days, and forecasters said it could dump one and a- half inches of rain an hour. communities northeast of los angeles were threatened. mountain areas there were burned bare by a wildfire last summer. today, los angeles county sheriff's deputies went door-to- door ordering residents to leave about 600 homes. the virginia couple known as the white house gate crashers have balked at talking to a congressional committee. at a house hearing today, tareq and michaele salahi invoked their right against self-incrimination, and declined to answer questions. a federal grand jury is investigating how the pair got past secret service checkpoints at a white house state dinner last november without invitations. members of a house committee tried in vain today to shed light on what happened. >> you dressed the part with the intent of attending a state dinner. you did not receive an official invite, your backgrounds were

not checked, your names did not appear on a guest list, and your request for an invitation from michelle jones was denied and rebuffed. can you tell me what more did you need to know you were not invited? >> on the advice of counsel, i respectfully reserve my right to remain silent and decline to answer your question. >> sreenivasan: the salahi's did say they'd be willing to testify later, once the criminal investigation is over. the white house social secretary, desiree rogers, was in charge of the state dinner. administration officials have refused to let her appear before the committee. those are some of the day's main stories. i'll be back at the end of the program with a preview of what you'll find tonight on the "newshour's" web site. but for now, back to jeff. >> brown: and we turn to the continuing devastation in haiti-- hit today by one of the strongest aftershocks yet -- magnitude 5.9. it brought new terror among thousands of hungry, homeless survivors of last week's earthquake. we have a pair of reports on the situation today, from

"independent television news," beginning with sarah smith. a warning-- some of the images are disturbing. >> reporter: flames are consuming what's left of the church of the perpetual. what wasn't destroyed by the earthquake and aftershocks will be taken by arson. ( crying ) the violent aftershock at dawn terrified people who were already traumatized. it felt like another large quake. >> it was like the first one. >> reporter: and that must make people very afraid. >> yes, they was, they was very afraid. my mom cried, because she think it will be the same thing like the first time, very afraid. >> reporter: thousands of people are living on the streets because they have to, they have no where else to go. but others chose to sleep out here. some of the houses are still standing, so why are people still sleeping in the streets? >> so, they fear.

they are very scared now. every time there is the shaking, they are very, very, very scared. >> reporter: most people say they have no idea where to find the aid that is now getting to parts of the city. one million rations delivered in the last week, but three million people need food and water daily. >> you can tell from the litter around here that some food aid is getting through. this wrapper from a humanitarian daily ration says it's a food gift from the people of the united states of america. but getting this through once isn't enough, the people here need to be fed every day, and they're going to need it for a very long time to come. when water does arrive, it can cause chaos. desperate people try to grab what they can, even grabbing it from each other. the weak, the thirsty. how careful do you have to be, are there problems handing out aid? >> our teams go in, they try to

sensitize the community, and basically let them know we can't distribute to everyone at one time, that the assessment's on going. distributions will happen over time. ( screaming ) >> ifill: weapons are appearing on the street, too. fights breaking out over the meager supplies. and the threat of more serious violence hangs in air. by night, port-au-prince is a frightening vision. people with no where to go walk down dark streets past the burning remains of their ruined city. then, out of the darkness walks a miracle. she closely followed by her brother, moses. triumphantly rescued after a week trapped within their family house. well over 100 people have been pulled from the wreckage alive, and there may be more. but it's now believed well over

100,000 people have perished. >> ifill: next, jon snow of "independent television news" reports on the suffering among the seriously injured in port- au-prince. again, some of the images are tough to look at. >> reporter: security here at the general hospital is not the issue-- amputation is. in the aftermath of today's aftershock, many patients are still quartered in the hospital courtyard. the delay in getting them inside, anywhere, is costing them limbs and lives. you need more surgeons? >> more orthopedic. >> reporter: how long will you have to wait for that? >> we're trying to open more operating rooms over here, but no x-ray machines >> reporter: what do you need? >> x-ray. >> reporter: dr. even lyon is here from harvard. he's worked here before. >> we are running our operating rooms without electricity, without oxygen, without proper anesthetics. and standing in front of me are hundreds of people who've had

compound open fractures. >> reporter: do you just have to feel your way in the fracture, feel out what it is? >> uh, yeah. we have to, to be honest, the bigger problem is infection. the bones may heal, they may not heal. we've done many, many amputations. we're losing people who are losing limbs. >> reporter: is gangrene a problem? or not yet? >> no, it's been a problem for five days now. it sets in right away. >> reporter: the wards deemed safe after the earthquake are crammed with amputees. men, women, children. people whose lives on the edge will be forever rendered more challenging. amputations are carried out, barely off the ward. limited anesthetic, and no pain killer. headphones and music are her only comfort. across town, the well-run children's hospital is battling with much tinier amputees. a boy, each side of the room,

with legs taken off below the knee. one of them, very sick indeed. and two girls, similarly maimed. adaliene joseph, whose mother died in the rubble under which she herself was pinned for half an hour. >> brown: international efforts to relieve the suffering in haiti were boosted today. the u.s. navy hospital ship "comfort" arrived off port-au- prince with 550 medical staff on board. and the first patients were transferred by helicopter for treatment. in washington, secretary of state hillary clinton said she's not satisfied with how fast things are moving, but understands the difficulties. there were so many challenges that had to be addressed all at once. the other way of looking at it is that it's really remarkable how much we've gotten done. >> ifill: >> ifill: for more, margaret warner spoke a short time ago

with jason beaubien of "national public radio." he is in port-au-prince.áa- ason beaubien, welcome, thank you for being with us. tell us, first, about what this latest, biggest aftershock felt like this morning? >> this one really jolted. this is the most powerful aftershock we've had since the quake last week. it jolted the city awake. i went out on the streets right after that. many were sleeping on the streets and i talked to people sleeping on the pavement and they were saying they were praying to god that this was not going to be a quake like the one that hit here last week. fortunately, it wasn't. we were expecting more damage, possibly more buildings to have fall own people. in terms of my reporting, going out and talking to people, did not find any more buildings that had fall own people. there were some landslides. there were some bit of debris that had fallen over but overall it seemed they get through this okay and there wasn't that much

extra damage from this aftershock this morning. >> warner: what is the latest, from what you've been able to see, about the pace of delivery? secretary clinton said today, "every day is better," she said, "today is better than yesterday." is it? >> reporter: today is certainly better than yesterday, but in terms of the amount of aid that's actually getting out, it's still not reaching all the people that need it, the hundreds of thousands of people that are desperately in need of food and clean water and shelter. i went out and say the operation that the 82nd airborne is doing on the golf course and today it really hit its stride. yesterday, they had a bunch ofs problems. they ran out of food. they had a mass of about 20,000 people just storming up the hill and it turned into, you know, almost a fiasco yesterday. today, they had the helicopters coming in-- seahawks, the navy staleion helicopters coming in. boom, they were landing on the ground.

they were unloading fast. another helicopter was coming in right behind it. the food was moving out, the water was moving out. they had 50 people a minute moving through these lines, 50 people a minute getting packages of food, two bottles of water each, and in terms of the city right now, this is the most impressive aid operation i have seen in terms of getting food into the hands of people who need it, and today it really hit its stride for the first time. >> warner: what is the security situation like in the city? you had a dramatic piece yesterday about witnessing the looting of the main commercial district? what's it like now? >> you're getting sporadic looting. it's happening in different parts at different times. this morning, it really ramped up down in the commercial districts. i saw a supermarket that was getting looted. there was a huge crowd, probably a couple of hundred people. they were climbing over-- the building that i would be terrified to even step on, and they were climbing in through the ceiling, into this supermarket, and pulling out

whatever they could-- food, beer plastic chairs-- and coming out into the streets and fighting over it. it's really chaotic. i talked to people down there and they're very uppront. "we don't have anything, and we're going to go into these shops and get it, expwts even go into buildings that are incredibly dangerous and attempt to get food, get water, get what they need. obviously, there are criminal elements as well that would like to steal everything they could, bit many people involved in this are simply doing it out of desperation. >> warner: now, we've heard reports, includinging your own, of people fleeing port-au-prince and going out into the countryside. how expensive is that and your own travels from the dominican republic to the city. you've seen the countryside. what are they likely to find once they get out there? >> reporter : quite frankly, as soon as you get out of port-au-prince heading to the dominican republic, things are fairly stable and fairly normal. the question is whether the haitian countryside can support hundreds of thousands of people from the capital fleeingut into these areas.

certainly, there's not the infrastructure to do that. certainly, there's not the food and the water and the basic supplies people need out there. that's going to be a question. it's really hard to gage, quite frankly, how many people are fleeing the city. i was down at the bus station, and many people were trying to get on buses, trying to get out, but in terms of numbers it's really, really difficult to say. >> warner: finally, briefly, how are ordinary haitians getting information? you mentioned-- one of your pieces mentioned rumors. is it by rumor or is there some organized way to radio or something else to get reliable information to people? >> reporter: communication remains a huge problem. you know, there's no newspapers. some of the radio stations are functioning. people are getting information through that. however, many people don't have radios. many people are simply sleeping out on the streets and they don't have access even to radios. so rumors are flying around. it's certainly one of the ways that information is spreading,

but, clearly, it's not the best. it's a huge problem in terms of the information that's being moved out to the people. by the same token, we're not hearing much from the haitian government, from president preval owhat the way forward is here. so that's a big question, and it's something people are not get anything solid information about. >> warner: requested bow of npr, thank you so much. >> reporter: you're welcome, margaret. >> brown: now, will consumers pay for news online? with the internet exploding with free content, the entire media world is struggling to find ways to support itself financially in the future. nowhere is that issue more urgent than for newspapers, which have seen huge drops in circulation and advertising revenues. today, the "new york times," with by far the most popular newspaper web site, announced that beginning in 2011 it will charge frequent readers for access to the site. the paper would use a metered

system, allowing visitors to read a given number of articles each month for free. and then requiring a fee for unrestricted access. subscribers to the paper's print edition would continue to have full access to the web site. an earlier attempt by the times to get readers to pay for some online content was called off in 2007. and the new move is, by all accounts, a risky one that will be much watched throughout the media world. we take our own look now with bill mitchell of the "poynter institute", a school for journalists in florida, where he focuses on new economic models for news. and bill grueskin, dean of academic affairs at the academic affairs at the columbia graduate school of journalism, and former managing editor of the "wall street journal online", the largest subscription news sites on the web. bill mitchell, before away get to whether it's a good idea, fill in the picture here a bit on the mechanics of how this would work. what's the key piece to this? >> the key piece, jeff, is as

you pointed out, is it's really a metered system. readers will still be able to, if they come to the "times" site from google or elsewhere, be abe to read a certain number of articles for month. the "times" has not indicated what that number will be yet. buta some point, a wall will go up, and the reader will be informed to read additional articles, you're going to have to pay a fee. >> brown: bill grueskin , to fill in the context a bit more, how big a problem is this for the "times" and other papers to solve? what's the role now of the internet for newspapers in terms of their finances? >> this is really the problem facing media right now. they've seen their online relationship and online audiences growing dramaticly, but they haven't seen the kind of revenue from online growing at the same rate. a few years ago during the heyday of online advertising, media executives would say online ads are going to grow in terms of revenue 25%, to 30% a

year on ad infinitum but that didn't happen. online advertising is in democrat trouble right now. it's not providing anywhere near the kind of support for big news organizations like the name. -- "new york times". there are not that many other ways to raise money other than advertising or circulation. >> brown: so bill mitchell there was a lively debate within the "times" as there has been at other places whether to do something like this. what's the argument for it? what's the hope that they can get out of this? >> i don't think you'll fine anyone at the "times" who would argue that they've got this really figured out yet, but i think it's an experiment that has to be taken. and i think the idea of seeing what people will pay for, if sufficient value can be added to the content online, is really something that's got to be tried. >> brown: what does that mean-- i'm sorry-- what does that mean "sufficient value being added?" >>iont people are simply going

to pay tomorrow for news that is available today free. just as i don't pay for the newspaper that shows up in my driveway. i'm not really paying so much for the news itself as i am paying for the convenience of that delivery, the experience of holding the news and the newsprint. i think the "times" really faces a significant challenge in figuring out what the digital equivalent to those kind of conveniences and user experiences are in the online edition. >> brown: bill grueskin, what's the risk? you were involveed in this at the wall street jornol. is it different here? >> the clearest risk and the one keeping the "new york times" from doing this earlier is they may diminish their huge online audience by a fair number of readers because people, when they hit a wall, will just go somewhere else for their news. the "new york times" has a tough argument to make here. what do you tell your customers-- this product we've been giving you for 15 years for free,

now we're going to start charging you for. there's a moral argument for it, but moral arguments work better in churches and synagogues than they do in commercial enterprises. >> brown: what's the moral argument? the moral argument is we provide a civic service. we provide the kind of accountability journalively in washington and in all the media in new york city and around the world that is required to make this democracy function, and the current economic model isn't supporting that civic service so you , the readers, need to support it. >> brown: you're suggesting that's a tough argument to make for people who have had free access online for years. >> exactly, exactly. i think the other thing going on here, because the way they structured this deal, they aren't really anticipating that much revenue from online subscriptions. what they're really trying to do is protect the print product because at the end of the day it's the print newspaper that generates most of the revenue for the "new york times" as it does for almost every other newspaper in the united states

and around the world. >> brown: bill mitchell what, do you make of both the moral argument and more important probably, the expectation , the mindset that so many of vus that can go online for free. >> i think bill makes a very good point. they're not going to be able to make a moral argument successfully online. this is not a matter of what readers or users should or shouldn't pay for. they're going to pay for news online only if they find it to be worth their money. i think when you look at what's happening with the "times" in print, they've got more than 800,000 readers paying as much as $769 a year to get the paper delivered. so i think the calculation has to be what can they add to their online news that will encourage enough of that online audience to begin paying. >> brown: and just staying with you, bill mitchell. on the plus side would be the "new york times" itself, the brand, the history, the quality that they've offered to people. >> of course.

as bill pointed out, online advertising simply is not going to sustain the quality of journalism that the times-- that the readers have come to expect from the "times." they really need to find multiple revenue streams. and i would expect that this form of online payment will be just one of many things that will emerge over the next year. i think the "times" was smart, actually, to give themselves a year to work on this because it's going to be a very complicated problem. >> brown: bill grueskin, broaden it out a bit for us. what do we know so far about what consumers and will will not pay for? what other things are papers doing? >> well, what you see right now among a the lo of publishers, both the magazine and newspaper industry, is a hope and expect thagz other devices, whether it's the amazon kindle, whether it's the tabloid that apple is supposed to be coming out with later this month, whether it's blackberrys and iphones, using

other devices to access their content will provide ways of generating more subscription revenue. i think most publishers have come to the conclusion it's very hard to generate a lot of subscription revenue way web site that's basically on a p.c.. people have been trained now since the early 1990s that if it's on the p.c., you really don't have to pay for it. >> brown: bill mitchell what, do you see in terms of other experiments or other attempts to lure in readers paying? >> well, one that's coming soon is a -- an option to enable readers simply to contribute to news organizations. it's a voluntary payment system. i think we'll see more of that , probably not at a paper like the "new york times", but at smaller news organizations around the country. the "miami herald" now on the bottom of each story include both an invitation to subscribe to the paper in print and an invitation to donate for good

journalism at the "herald". >> brown: and bill mitchell, staying with you, the other side of this is advertising. when do we know about how advertisers feel about these kind of paid-for subscriptions? >> it's a very risky calculation. the critical challenge the "times" faces is not chasing away so many of its online readers that it really diminishes the number of eyeballs it can deliver to advertisers. on the other hand, advertisers appreciate the intensity of relationship that's reflected by people who are paying to actually read the news and are staying commit to the newspaper. >> brown: gur, do you want to weigh in on that one finally? >> one of the things we found at the ""wall street journal" online" which had a subscription model indicating back to 1996, i believe, is that advertisers in many ways valued the online journal's audience more because it was a subscription site. they knew exactly the kinds of reader whorpz seeing their ads. they can target their ads better

to the readers. and ultimately, that's one of the great promises of the internet-- the ability to no just amass large audiences but target specific content and advertising for smaller niche audiences. in so far it can help the "new york times" with that, it could be a benefit on the advertising side that could more than make up for the drop in traffic. >> brown: thanks for helping us walk through this 37 two bills, bill mitchell and bill grueskin. thank you both very much. >> ifill: finally tonight, the latest on efforts to ramp up air safety through new technology. at a homeland security hearing today, secretary janet napolitano told senators she believes new screening techniques are a key part of a larger strategy to stop terrorism. >> once you've identified a problem, you've got to fix it. but we also need to be thinking ahead to be proactive. that's why, for example, we've entered into this agreement to really get some of the best

scientists in the world who are in our national labs thinking well ahead about the next generation of screening technology and what it can show us. >> ifill: ray suarez has been looking into some of the latest technology being rolled out in the nation's airports. here's his report. >> suarez: it's been almost a month since umar farouk abdul- mutallab allegedly tried to blow up northwest flight 253. since then, the debate over how to keep the flying public safe has intensified, and a chief focus has been the use of so- called "body scanners." >> we currently have 40 machines >> suarez: top security officials have sped up deployment of the scanners. currently, there are only 40 machines in 19 of the 450 commercial airports in the united states that follow t.s.a. security procedures. 450 more will come online this year to screen passengers for items concealed under layers of clothing. 350 of those were ordered with recently allocated funds.

the machines cost upwards of $150,000. but there are concerns from those who claim that the health and privacy of travelers would be at risk. there are two kinds of machines. the first, millimeter wave, is a booth that uses harmless electromagnetic waves to create a three dimensional image. the other kind, a backscatter machine, takes a double x-ray to create a two-sided image. dr. mahadevappa mahesh, chief physicist at johns hopkins university hospital, showed us how they work. he said the radiation levels, especially with the backscatter machine, are not high. >> the radiation dose levels are quite low. when i say quite low, let's give a comparison with the respiratory medical chest x-ray, let's say. compared to a medical chest x- ray, a typical backscatter, you need to acquire or go through the scanners nearly 1,000 to 2,000 times before the dose reaches to a typical chest x-

ray. >> suarez: all in all, mahesh believes the body scanners are safe, but that people in high risk groups-- like pregnant women and children-- should have the option not to use them. >> what i normally suggest is we have a couple of airports in the u.s., which have installed both of these technologies and right now, they are giving public an option to go through these things and not go through these things. >> suarez: even if the federal aviation administration is able to convince travelers that the machines are safe, there is still the privacy concern. the american civil liberties union has called the use of scanners a "virtual strip search." mark rotenberg, executive director of the electronic privacy information center in washington, says privacy is being compromised for a machine that doesn't even detect all harmful materials. >> if you look at the specs, you see reference to explosives and weapons but not to powders. and that's significant because

p.e.t.n. is a powder, it's what abdulmutallab tried to use on 12/25. it's what richard reid, the shoe bomber, tried to use previously. and it's very hard to detect. it's not obvious that these devices would have found it. >> suarez: but mahesh argues the steps taken to ensure privacy-- like blurring faces-- render people anonymous. >> what happens is, like, the person who is asking the public to scan is not there next to the scanner, he's there remotely. so, there's less chances of somebody seeing a supermodel next to the scanner, and next seeing their image and trying to sell it off to "the national enquirer" and all of those things, that has been the concern of the public, but to avoid those things. >> suarez: for rotenberg, that is just not good enough. >> i think the t.s.a. has been very misleading on this point. in fact, they're going to detect prosthetics, mastectomy scars, they're going to detect sex change operations, adult incontinence. those are the types of images that will be available to the

t.s.a. operators. >> suarez: at baltimore washington international airport recently, many of the passengers we spoke with seemed comfortable being scanned. >> no, particular concerns, as long as they don't damage me, right, they're not harmful health-wise, then that's fine. >> if the technology is there that they're looking for bombs or secured, or unsecured instruments that people can hurt myself or any other passenger, then deal with it or drive! >> suarez: but at chicago's o'hare airport just days after the foiled christmas bombing, some said the government should be doing more to uncover terror plots instead of bothering innocent people. >> i feel like they're not doing... the governments are not doing a really great job at the front end, finding people who really are trying to do something to other people. whereas all the rest of us are just going to visit friends and going to visit family. we're not doing anything. it's so invasive, possibly to the point of unconstitutional. >> suarez: former homeland security chief michael chertoff-

- who is a consultant for one company that manufactures body scanners-- says that given the capability and intent of terrorists, we may have to trade some privacy for security. >> now you have to ask yourself this question. once we have the privacy protections in place, are you prepared to accept a certain amount of discomfort in looking at what may you have concealed on your body, in return for knowing that you're not going to have a plane detonating in mid- air. and i think i know, speaking for myself, and most people i've spoken to would rather get to their destination safely even if it means adjusting their privacy expectations. >> suarez: when all is said and done, could body scanning machines have prevented the christmas day attack? chertoff thinks so. >> are they perfect? no. but do they take us very much further down the road of security against this kind of device? the answer to that is yes. >> suarez: during the last debate over body imaging, the

opponents won the argument. after the christmas day bomb attempt, even if controversies continue, americans can expect to see more body scanners when they fly. >> brown: again, the major developments of the day: president obama and democrats the u.s. senate race in massachusetts raised serious doubts about democrats' ability to pass health care reform. the "newshour" is always online. hari sreenivasan, in our newsroom, previews what's there. >> sreenivasan: more on how the massachusetts senate election results affect the balance of power on capitol hill. we put that question and others to chris cillizza of "the washington post." dante chinni of the "patchwork nation" offers another take on scott brown's victory. he says it maybe more about a longer term trend than just about parties. an update on executive bonuses and how big banks are reacting to proposals for new taxes that comes from "wall street journal" columnist dennis berman. and on "art beat," it's your turn to ask the questions to the head of the national endowment for the arts, rocco landesmann.

all that and more is on our web site, newshour.pbs.org. >> brown: and again to our honor roll of american service personnel killed in the iraq and afghanistan conflicts. we add them as their deaths are made official and photographs become available. here, in silence, are 11 more.

>> ifill: and that's the "newshour" for tonight. i'm gwen ifill. >> brown: and i'm jeffrey brown. we'll see you on-line and again here tomorrow evening. thank you and good night. major funding for the pbs newshour is provided by: >> what the world needs now is energy. the energy to get the economy humming again. the energy to tackle challenges like climate change. what if that energy came from an

energy company? everyday, chevron invests $62 million in people, in ideas-- seeking, teaching, building. fueling growth around the world to move us all ahead. this is the power of human energy. chevron. pacific life. and by toyota. the national science foundation. >> and by the bill and melinda gates foundation. dedicated to the idea that all people deserve the chance to live a healthy productive life.

and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org